About your Search

20130211
20130219
STATION
MSNBC 23
MSNBCW 23
CSPAN2 16
CNNW 6
WHUT (Howard University Television) 6
CNN 5
CSPAN 5
KQED (PBS) 3
WETA 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
FBC 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 110
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 110 (some duplicates have been removed)
that put big, big bets. we're lucky we have mit and caltech, but we are not at the country, the government side or the corporate side, putting those investments together and that's what i worry about. we're not investing more into it, when not going to be the ones that read the benefits. >> i think that's the question. is their net, whatever its taking place, in basic technology to support the stuff that you want to do. >> it's the case were lots of research as an economist would put a social -- the private return is insufficient to generate the private sector. and so that's why i think we have to look for more of these types of partnerships between government, industry. so one good example of this is collaboration that the federal government has with the semiconductor industry, where, so simply no amount institutions like bell labs, which created large investments in developing the first transistor, government and industry are now cosponsoring a series of university-based centers of excellence at mit and stanford and berkeley and ucla that our first alternative figure how do we take, as f
government and have very different views about what should be done. because of this, parses want to organize and coordinate but campaign finance laws but restraint of that. laws were designed during canada-centered elections and parties to an answer that much. we did it matter that much. we knew where the money was coming from. now we have super pacs and there is a severe mismatch between a high stakes system an old- fashioned laws that force money outside the regulated system and things will only get worse as every member of congress wants their own super pac and we're going to have an arms race. i don't see it becoming evidence that citizens united will have an impact on this. let me start with redistribution. total spending did not explode like many said. at least it doesn't seem that way from initial estimates. total spending was about the same or slightly less compared to 2008 based on estimates by the center for responsive politics. re close to the previous election and it includes all spending. same is true for congressional elections. total spending seems to have declined by 300 mill
, a lot of these congressmen who have been in government for a while, and some of the new ones are doing the job that they were sent there to do. they are representing the constituency from where they are from. the democrats do the same. i know we have differences on both sides of the aisle, but i believe that being able to -- being able to work together and coming together as a nation and congress has a lot to do with barack obama as the president. he was reelected. he needs to be in the white house. he needs to lead this nation. he does not need to be out in campaign mode. that is all i have seen from barack obama. campaign, speech -- let's get everybody in the white house, and let's get things done. guest: a couple of points -- we hear this from constituents, that they are frustrated that they are not seeing the leadership. what he is saying really plays into that. leaders are team builders. they know how to bring people forward to find consensus. the president's speech the other night was all about the president and about his plans. it was not about the items that are on the wrong tr
areas are worse than others. the government has a compelling interest to address this. they need to try to put rules on the table, not to take away the second amendment, but to enforce more rules to negate these happenings. host: the president several times reiterating that the proposal deserves a vote. what he think? caller: i agree. congress is our lawmakers. they put things in place and have to have a vote on this. i agree it should come to that. i believe in the second amendment. we have to make concessions here. host: do you think that congress will take up the votes and what the president is proposing? what do you ultimately think will, of that? caller: i think it will come to a decision. it has become very imperative to do something about it. at this time i think they are going to come to a fair decision across the board, how to address this and put rules in place that we have to negate thkis from happening. host: jim from twitter says this -- "vote on it and move it down, and then move onto something important." we go to ralph on the democrat'' line. caller: i agree with the aut
. we're stuck with this old-fashioned technology because, as susan crawford explains, our government has allowed a few giant conglomerates to rig the rules, raise prices, and stifle competition. just like standard oil in the first gilded age a century ago. in those days, it was muckrakers like ida tarbell and lincoln steffens rattling the cages and calling for fair play. today it's independent thinkers like susan crawford. the big telecom industry wishes she would go away, but she's got a lot of people on her side. in fact, if you go to the white house citizen's petition site, you'll see how fans of "captive audience" are calling on the president to name susan crawford as the next chair of the federal communications commission. "prospect" magazine named her one of the "top ten brains of the digital future," and susan crawford served for a time as a special assistant to president obama for science, technology and innovation. right now she teaches communications law at the benjamin cardozo school of law here in new york city and is a fellow at the roosevelt institute. susan crawford, w
government is actually capable of doing? i mean, you talk about the economy and jobs. there is, obviously, debate how many jobs have actually been created in the economy. look. you pointed out to apple ceo, tim cook was in the audience in the state of the union. he is sitting on over 171 million dollars in cash at apple. why? because uncertainty in the marketplace. tom friedman writing this morning something that caught my eye. he said you can feel the economy wants to launch but washington is sitting on the national mute button. we the people feel like the children of permanently divorcing parents. how does this sequestered business end? the president said during the campaign the sequester, the word for automatic spending cuts, he said it would not happen. is it going to happen? >> i always read tom friedman he has that good minnesota sensibility. >> you guys stick together. >> we do. the column today i think is continuation of that. frankly, i believe it's a continuation of exactly the plan the president laid out in detail in the state of the union on tuesday night. we have already made
on wall street all the way to a trial. >> ooh, this ought to be good. please proceed, government regulators. >> we've actually had a fairly -- a fair number of consent orders. we do not have to bring people to trial or -- >> well, i appreciate you say you don't have to bring them to trial. my question is when did you bring them to trial? >> we have not had to do it as a practical matter to achieve our supervisory goals. >> and senator warren wasn't done making her point. >> we look at the distinction between what we could get if we go the trial and what we could get if we don't. >> i appreciate that that's what everybody does. so the question i'm really asking is can you identify when you last took the wall street banks to trial? >> um, i will have to get back to you with the specific information. >> i think they all need water on that panel. what do you think? the government has acted cowardly when it comes to the big banks, no doubt about it. deals are cut and civil cases get settled out of court. the banks don't have to change any of their behavior. you and i get stuck, or cou
because the government itself is a consistent obstacle. the national federation of independent businesses recently released figures from december indicating the mood of businesses is at a recession level. 70% of business owners that were surveyed identified the current environment as a bad time to expand and political uncertainty topped the list for the reasons not to attempt economic growth. lee, a resident of muskogee, oklahoma, and president of acme corporation, said a lot of small businesses had to go in debt to stay afloat. he said now they can't make the money they need to to pay down debts due in large part the environment the government has created. i joined a small group of members in congress. i have faced unprecedented difficulties ensuring my business succeeded. i step on the floor of the united states house of representatives with a firsthand understanding how high the hurdles are for a business to succeed and just simply jump over. last month when president obama was sworn into his second term, i was reminded of something he said four years ago in his first inauguration. the
to call for higher taxes to pay for more and more government spending. i don't believe the president acknowledges or at least he didn't last evening, the seriousness of our debt and fiscal crisis. we are nearly $16.5 trillion in debt, and $6 trillion of that debt is from the president's spending over the last four years. and he now has four more years to go. yet rather than tell the american people specifically how he will reduce this unsteanlt debt he pulled out the same tired playbook and made it clear his basic fiscal plan is ever-higher taxes. an almost obsession with telling the american people you're not taxed enough. when we are taxed to death practically and when you add up not just the federal but the state and the local and the sales and the excise and the gasoline and the entertainment and all the other taxes that american people pay in their daily lives that cuts into their paycheck in a very significant way each week, the real question is, is the solution to our problem more taxes on the american people? mr. president, you got your taxes. in the fiscal cliff debate you h
. the quote of the night it is not a bigger government we need. it is a smarter government. >>brian: the president can deliver a speech. he was totally in his element yesterday. he looked totally -- anyone who wants to do well in front of a crowd, you look at bill clinton, ronald reagan and i think president obama. here's the area on which they can agree. immigration reform, both sides agree. voting reform, both sides agree. tax reform, both sides agree. how are they going to do it? at least we know they can approach that together. the spending stuff, why isn't anybody talking about a infrastructure bank, maybe a combination or mostly private banks who have all this money and don't want to spend it or lend it, maybe the government can push the private banks lending into build these bridges in a way in which states can pay back or the people can pay back. >>steve: you were taublging about what a great -- talking about what a great speech the president of the united states gave. there's franken. were you watching john boehner? that guy looked like the guy at the end of a big dinner wh
government and the previous one. the latest figures show people -- at 600 pounds per pupil per year less than english average. the worst in the entire country. does the prime minister agree that this is simply unfair? will you support our school campaign and pledged to end this discrepancy in this parliament? >> prime minister spent i will look carefully at what my honorable friend said. what -- we have protected the schools budget so that the per pupil funding is the same throughout this parliament. so head teachers can plan on the basis, and by encouraging academy schools and preschools we are making sure that schools get more of the education money going directly to them. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the isf describes the chance was benefits cut is giving with one hand and taking away with many others. does the prime minister think that the sister on hard-working families were at the same time he is giving to millionaires with both hands? >> i don't agree with the honorable lady but that's what the isf saves it as i quoted the lastly, the isf point out that actually the highest increase in t
economy is taken by the federal government. he didn't say any of this. he didn't say any of this because it's embarrassing. it's a disaster. >>brian: he's got 52% approval rating but 54% of the people say they're on the wrong track. it is how you describe your family. the american public likes him personally and they factor in what can you do about it? we like him and we're going to take the job performance away from the likeability. >>steve: most republicans -- >>brian: it's almost as if what can you do? he's our president and i like him personally, so i'm not going to hold him responsible for the food stamps and unemployment, the lack of economic growth or diminishing standing around the world, the shrinking of our military. >>gretchen: we talked about how the polls even before the election seemed to say, the most recent one ing probleming, 83% think in the country. yet to listen to the state of the union it was about more spending. there is this disconnect, cognitive distance, family relations, whatever you want to call it. >>steve: the fact that the president was pushing a very liber
number of people out there are circling the wagons. they see the government coming to collect their guns, and they're preparing for fight. the only thingy figure is that movement, crude as it may be to throw these two issues together toward personal freedom, toward individual autonomy is growing, profoundly on the right as well as the left. people want to make their own decisions. they do. and it may be dangerous for society as a whole to allow this when it comes to gun buying, but there row visit. one bet you can make on america we are still a cowboy country. we like to get around in our own cars, live in our separate houses, read whatever, see whatever, pretty much do whatever. and the difference here is doing harm to others. two people getting married doesn't hurt someone else's marriage, nor does it reduce its reverence or love. having a gun in the wrong hands, freedom for that person can mean death for lots of others. and that is where the desire for freedom jumps the tracks. that's where our cowboy urge need wyatt earp to come in and clean up dodge city. and that's "hardball" for n
info about the benghazi situation even though hagel wasn't even in the government when benghazi happened. sick stuff. and it seems to be growing in inverse proportion to obama's popularity. the better he looks, the worse these characters, inhofe, cruz, mccain, and lindsey graham, are determined to look. did you notice the smile on john boehner's face sitting up there behind the president during the state of the union? if you did, you're imagining things. so afraid of the hard hating right of republicans these days of every stripe, even boehner's scared to death of looking like he might like something barack obama had to say. to do that is to risk political death in these days. let's go at it. our guests are joy reid of the grio and michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee. both are msnbc analysts and good ones. let's take a look at this. is this delay on the hagel vote about playing for time hoping new information comes out about them? "the new york times" reports today that anti-hagel groups are right now hoping for exactly that. quote, leaders of th
things but in part on negotiations with the government of afghanistan over legal protections for our troops. the president has made clear that then missions of residual u.s. presence in afghanistan after 2014 will be limited to current terrorism operations and training and advising afghan forces. general austin would bring exceptional experience in overseeing this transition, having commanded u.s. forces in iraq during the reduction of u.s. forces and equipment from iraq. just this past weekend our forces in afghanistan have had a change of command, with general joseph duckworth replacing general john allen as commander of the international securities systems forces and commander of u.s. forces afghanistan. i want to take this opportunity to thank general allen for his thoughtful and devoted leadership in afghanistan, for his forthrightness and his interactions with me and the rest of the members of this committee. when senator reid and i visited afghanistan in january, we saw a real signs of progress, including the afghan security forces increasingly taking the lead responsibility f
willingly whether it's in government, whether it's in your office? i mean it just doesn't happen. so i think that the irony here, one of them, is that this man who many people associate with the middle ages is going to go down in history as a modernizer because he really showed this modern reality and was the first, you know, even 600 years ago when it happened, it happened to heal a schism. this is happening because he, a, sees we're living longer now, but, b, sees for all the incense and candlelight around the papacy, it's also a job, and there are certain requirements of the job, and if you can't do it, what he's saying and voting with his feet, is that you need to leave. >> well said. >> amen. >> i think it shows a lot of humility. in april of 2005 when pope john paul ii died, we broadcasted "hardball" from rome. as we closed our last show from there, let's listen. look at these people standing for hours, day and night, through the avenues of rome, packed together as if they had been caught and crushed in an industrial strength trash compacter. there they stood seeking no edge, plotting
is when one side or the other -- which it has a perfect right to do under our system of government -- decides to try to kill a nomination by denying 60 votes or to stop legislation by 60 votes. the democrats have done it on a regular basis when they were in the minority, and the distinguished majority leader was one of the most effective persons in -- in the senate at doing that. i presided many times over the senate when he objected. i remember the -- you know, when we were trying to get 60 votes to -- to have a permanent change in the estate law and we'd get up to 57 or 58 or 59 and the distinguished majority leader would object. now, what are we doing today? we're doing today exactly what was said when the vote was called. the question was, do 60 of us believe that it's time to end debate on the nomination of the president to be secretary of defense, the leader of the largest military organization in the world, the largest employer in the united states, and the senate armed services committee has reported that recommendation to the senate two days ago? not ten days ago, not 15 d
during his last state of the union address from his first term. [video clip] >> we know government does not have all the answers. we know there's not a program for every problem. [applause] we know and we have worked to give the american people a smaller, less bureaucratic government in washington. we have to give the american people one that lives within its means. [cheers and applause] the era of big government is over. [cheers and applause] but we cannot go back to the time when our citizens or left to fend for themselves. [cheers and applause] instead we must go forward as one america, one nation working together to meet the challenges we face together. self-reliance and teamwork are not opposing virtues. we must have both. host: president bill clinton and after the government shutdown. that took place during his administration. we're talking about your favorite president. george is an independent in new york. caller: good morning. bill clinton, because he took a country that was -- he received the country from george h. w. bush, who did not seem to be a strong president to me, did
about government overreach than solving real problems. he says, where were they talking about school safety. why aren't we talking about hardening the targets. the president has been very skeptical about that and didn't say anything about it in his state of the union. >> you've got a packed "meet the press." you've got john mccain, denis mcdonough, the new white house chief of staff, and i want to start with sort of some obvious questions that mcdonough's going to face. chuck hagel watching this. the president is not going to get forced to pull back on this. >> he got re-elected and he wants his guy. the guy he wants is someone he's sympa sympatico with. he'll have to deal with these republicans who have this personal vendetta against him. he does carry this baggage. and i think these performance issues have not helped. his performance in his confirmation hearing did not make people inside the white house more confident about him. but, again, second term presidents, their level of confidence, who they want for the reasons they want them carry the day. >> john mccain, we saw all sides
to build an infrastructure, help the government provide basic services, build trust within a community, help build a secure structure. so these were things did not happen by coincidence. it was all part of this blog. and by the way, when i use the word plot, i generally am not a conspiracy guy. but these people refer to themselves as a plot. they called themselves the cabal, or the west point monkey because a lot of them came out of the social science department of west point, which had a tradition of forming networks among their own graduates. so this was very cautious here and for example, all of this happened not by coincidence. for example, petraeus when he was in leavenworth wasn't just sitting in leavenworth. he had a vast network of old colleagues throughout the pentagon bureaucracy. is reaching out to them. he deliberately forms a back channel. he cultivates this woman in the white house named meghan o'sullivan who was president bush's chief adviser on iraq in the national security council. he sees she's waving from the policy, he cultivates her. they're talking on the phone pr
. >> anna: good luck to you. coming up on fox and friends, here is the message from the government you never thought you would hear, hire criminals or else. all in the name of equal opportunity -- are you kidding me? donald trump weighs in. another drink please, you won't feel about booze here because it's also charity. details on one of the best ideas ever. that is coming up. ♪ ♪ ♪ stouffer's is proud to make america's favorite lasagna... with hand-layered pasta, tomatoes, and real mozzarella cheese. but what makes us even prouder... is what our real dinners can do for your family. stouffer's. let's fix dinner. how do you keep an older car running like new? you ask a ford customer. when they tell you that you need your oil changed you got to bring it in. if your tires need to be rotated, you have to get that done as well. jackie, tell me why somebody should bring they're car here to the ford dealership for service instead of any one of those other places out there. they are going to take care of my car because this is where it came from. price is right no problem, they make you feel l
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 110 (some duplicates have been removed)